Psycho-Babble Administration Thread 525223

Shown: posts 63 to 87 of 163. Go back in thread:

 

Re: Dr. Bob, is this civil? » Dr. Bob

Posted by crushedout on July 12, 2005, at 9:30:57

In reply to Re: Dr. Bob, is this civil?, posted by Dr. Bob on July 12, 2005, at 3:34:24

I wasn't aware that if you "worked things out" with someone, you don't get blocked. Deneb didn't even mind what alex said. So if I post something uncivil to Dinah, and it doesn't bother her, and then we talk about how it's all good between us, you won't PBC or block me?

 

Re: Dr. Bob, is this civil? » crushedout

Posted by gabbii on July 12, 2005, at 11:28:43

In reply to Re: Dr. Bob, is this civil? » Dr. Bob, posted by crushedout on July 12, 2005, at 9:30:57

Dr. Bob in a post to Toph, you said it really wasn't about whether or not posters worked things out between them, you'd P.B.C them anyway because it's a public board and you don't want other readers to have to be affected by it.

 

Sorry above for Dr. Bob,^^^^ pernicious button! (nm)

Posted by gabbii on July 12, 2005, at 14:16:29

In reply to Re: Dr. Bob, is this civil? » crushedout, posted by gabbii on July 12, 2005, at 11:28:43

 

Re: Dr. Bob, is this civil?

Posted by Dr. Bob on July 13, 2005, at 0:55:50

In reply to Re: Dr. Bob, is this civil? » crushedout, posted by gabbii on July 12, 2005, at 11:28:43

> Dr. Bob in a post to Toph, you said it really wasn't about whether or not posters worked things out between them, you'd P.B.C them anyway because it's a public board and you don't want other readers to have to be affected by it.

Right, that's the other side, and balancing the two can be hard. Do you have a link to that post? I'd be happy to take another look...

Bob

 

Re: Dr. Bob, is this civil? » Dr. Bob

Posted by gabbii on July 13, 2005, at 22:12:33

In reply to Re: Dr. Bob, is this civil?, posted by Dr. Bob on July 13, 2005, at 0:55:50

I tried to find it yesterday, but I'll look again.

 

Here is the link Dr. Bob

Posted by gabbii on July 13, 2005, at 22:19:32

In reply to Re: Dr. Bob, is this civil? » Dr. Bob, posted by gabbii on July 13, 2005, at 22:12:33

> is it not condescending for Bob to stop the discourse when both parties may not want his intrusion?
>
> Toph

One issue here is that posts aren't just between two people. Posters can discourse however they like by email, but what they post affects the environment for everyone.

Dr.Bob
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050128/msgs/455033.html

--

 

Re: Here is the link Dr. Bob

Posted by alexandra_k on July 14, 2005, at 9:55:16

In reply to Here is the link Dr. Bob, posted by gabbii on July 13, 2005, at 22:19:32

the post

http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041218/msgs/442385.html

the block

http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041218/msgs/442432.html

 

Re: Here is the link Dr. Bob

Posted by alexandra_k on July 14, 2005, at 9:58:19

In reply to Re: Here is the link Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on July 14, 2005, at 9:55:16

Though it got going a bit before that...

http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041218/msgs/442290.html

and

http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041218/msgs/442316.html

 

Re: Here is the link

Posted by Dr. Bob on July 15, 2005, at 23:03:38

In reply to Re: Here is the link Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on July 14, 2005, at 9:55:16

> > you said it really wasn't about whether or not posters worked things out between them, you'd P.B.C them anyway because it's a public board and you don't want other readers to have to be affected by it.
> >
> > gabbii

> the block
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041218/msgs/442432.html

Thanks for the links. I guess one factor is how uncivil the posts are. Does that make sense?

Bob

 

a complaint » Dr. Bob

Posted by crushedout on July 16, 2005, at 10:25:14

In reply to Re: Here is the link, posted by Dr. Bob on July 15, 2005, at 23:03:38

For the record, Dr. Bob, it is my impression that alex posts things regularly that other people (myself included) get PBC'd or blocked for but for some reason you usually seem to let it go with her, and I'm perplexed by this injustice. I don't intend this to be uncivil (and I hope it's not) -- it's just my observation and I hope you will make a note of it, and be careful not to favor certain posters unfairly in the future (whether that means not PBC'ing or blocking so much, or PBC'ing or blocking favored posters more, it doesn't matter that much to me).

Note: I am not judging alex's posts negatively --just noting the differential treatment of objectively similar behavior. One example: with testing the vulgar language automatic filter -- she has often pointed out its deficiencies in ways that have involved posting vulgar language. When I did the same thing -- with a *very* innocuous term, I might add (crazy-*ss)-- I got warned. This was a while ago, but I remember it and have noted similar injustices since then.

 

Re: a complaint

Posted by Dr. Bob on July 17, 2005, at 1:13:57

In reply to a complaint » Dr. Bob, posted by crushedout on July 16, 2005, at 10:25:14

> I hope you will ... be careful not to favor certain posters unfairly in the future

I'm sorry if I've treated you unfairly. I've tried not to. Favoritism is often a concern in groups.

> I am ... just noting the differential treatment of objectively similar behavior. One example: with testing the vulgar language automatic filter -- she has often pointed out its deficiencies in ways that have involved posting vulgar language. When I did the same thing -- with a *very* innocuous term, I might add (crazy-*ss)-- I got warned.

The behavior was similar, but I responded differently before the filter was in place...

Bob

 

Re: a complaint

Posted by Deneb on July 17, 2005, at 9:53:05

In reply to Re: a complaint, posted by Dr. Bob on July 17, 2005, at 1:13:57

<snip> Favoritism is often a concern in groups.

Does this mean that you acknowledge that sometimes your responses are affected by favoritism?

 

Re: a complaint » Deneb

Posted by Dinah on July 17, 2005, at 10:30:22

In reply to Re: a complaint, posted by Deneb on July 17, 2005, at 9:53:05

My guess, since Dr. Bob is interested in group dynamics, is that it's a general comment. Perhaps something he read in "The Large Group Re-Visited: The Herd, Primal Horde, Crowds and Masses".

And something that I'm quite sure he keeps in mind at all times.

(By the way, Dr. Bob. I ordered that book and read a bit of it to gain a better understanding of you since you quoted it. It seemed a bit depersonalizing, you know?)

 

P.S.

Posted by Dinah on July 17, 2005, at 10:32:00

In reply to Re: a complaint » Deneb, posted by Dinah on July 17, 2005, at 10:30:22

Good heavens, look at the price of that book.

I assure you, Dr. Bob, I wasn't that interested in how your mind worked. I got it inexpensively used, I'm sure.

 

Re: Group dynamics » Dinah

Posted by Deneb on July 17, 2005, at 10:42:48

In reply to Re: a complaint » Deneb, posted by Dinah on July 17, 2005, at 10:30:22

> My guess, since Dr. Bob is interested in group dynamics, is that it's a general comment. Perhaps something he read in "The Large Group Re-Visited: The Herd, Primal Horde, Crowds and Masses".

Cool. What role do I play here? The book is a little bit expensive for me. I wouldn't mind the price if it were something I was interested in, but I think it might get a little boring for me.

Have there been many people in the past who filled the role I play?

Who were they?

Deneb

 

Re: Group dynamics » Deneb

Posted by Dinah on July 17, 2005, at 10:47:03

In reply to Re: Group dynamics » Dinah, posted by Deneb on July 17, 2005, at 10:42:48

It doesn't go into that much detail, I don't think.

And it is rather dull.

 

Re: Group dynamics

Posted by Deneb on July 17, 2005, at 12:52:20

In reply to Re: Group dynamics » Deneb, posted by Dinah on July 17, 2005, at 10:47:03

I wonder what stage of development this community is at?

Are we growing and becoming enlightened and more supportive?

Or are we in a spiral towards stagnation and exclusion?

Deneb

 

Re: a complaint Dr. Bob

Posted by gabbii on July 17, 2005, at 13:31:11

In reply to Re: a complaint, posted by Dr. Bob on July 17, 2005, at 1:13:57

>
> The behavior was similar, but I responded differently before the filter was in place...
>
> Bob


That was but one example though. A couple of months ago I offered to send you several examples of posts the would have recieved P.B.C's if the poster were someone else.
You did say "Let's see how things go"
Well before that Fallen4myT had the same concern, and Now crushed has brought it up.These are all completly independent observations
about the same poster. Do you think you could at least take a closer look and see if there is some validity to this?
I don't think we're all delusional, perhaps because I tend to stick to the same boards I just don't see how many other posters you let off the hook. I do know however that if I had said to someone it's like "talking to a brick wall"
I'd have been P.B.C'd

I realize that the you've said the severity of the situations had influenced your response this particular time,(though I know Susan47 certainly wasn't given any breaks after she used a**)
I would think that eventually frequency of occurence should affect your response too.

 

Re: a complaint

Posted by alexandra_k on July 17, 2005, at 15:52:50

In reply to a complaint » Dr. Bob, posted by crushedout on July 16, 2005, at 10:25:14

I find it interesting that certain people seem more interested in getting me PBC'd / blocked than in supporting posters getting along with one another so intervention by administration is not required.

This used to really bug me.
But I've decided its just not worth it to me.

I find it rather ironic considering what these same people would prefer Lou to do instead of requesting for determinations.

And it's rather ironic considering that these same people resented administration intervention with regards to certain other posters (e.g., Larry Hoover).

 

Re: a complaint

Posted by alexandra_k on July 17, 2005, at 15:58:27

In reply to Re: a complaint, posted by alexandra_k on July 17, 2005, at 15:52:50

Completely independent observations are not obtained when people chat to one another off the boards. And they are not obtained when people read what other people have to say and see how I respond to them before deciding to agree.

I'm well aware that some people would prefer it if I wasn't here.

This used to really bug me...

But I've decided... It's just not worth it.

If people have a problem with me...
Then leave me alone.
I can extend the same courtesy in return.

 

Re: a complaint » alexandra_k

Posted by 10derHeart on July 17, 2005, at 16:41:08

In reply to Re: a complaint, posted by alexandra_k on July 17, 2005, at 15:58:27

((Alex)) I'm VERY glad you're here.

I'm very glad the other posters/people you refer to are here, too.

Very, very glad you're all here.

You're all so different, wonderfully articulate, sensitive, smart, observant, logical...and so much more...

I feel like I'm at a celebration of the best of the best many times on Babble.

I am honored just to be in your company.

I think maybe....it's bits of all those traits that bring out such passions to defend free speech, fairness, equality, etc. As well they should, I suppose.

Like someone (Dinah...I think?..) wrote recently...the qualities we admire and love the most in people seem to have flip sides....and can also be the qualities we "love to hate,"...or at least that irritate the cr*p out of us at times!

Just some ramblings....wish I could say something more insightful or helpful :-(

 

Re: a complaint Please Dr. bob? look at t his.

Posted by gabbii on July 17, 2005, at 16:53:21

In reply to Re: a complaint, posted by alexandra_k on July 17, 2005, at 15:52:50

> I find it interesting that certain people seem more interested in getting me PBC'd / blocked than in supporting posters getting along with one another so intervention by administration is not required.

That's a huge conclusion to jump to.
And I'm offended. I've often pointed out inconsistancies to you, as you know, and this is another one. (The last one was Pinkeye and Emmy I think) And it *certainly* doesn't keep me from supporting others, or crushed, and it's definitely not priority.
Furthermore I have never ONCE (take a look) said a negative word about Lou's posting. The opposite in fact.
Another incorrect conclusion.
And As Crushed said quite clearly

I'm not wanting anyone blocked but am pointing out inconsistancy here.


> I find it rather ironic considering what these same people would prefer Lou to do instead of requesting for determinations.

**Furthermore I have never ONCE (take a thorough look) said a negative word about Lou's posting. The opposite in fact.
Another incorrect conclusion.
AS the poster said "These""and there are only two here I'm automatically included

>> And it's rather ironic considering that these same people resented administration intervention with regards to certain other posters (e.g., Larry Hoover).
>
**
Again, a completely incorrect conclusion. The archives will show clearly that it was the length of the block I objected to, not administrative intervention, ever!

And independent conclusions can certainly be obtained when one thinks something first, and then notices that someone else has spoken about the same idea we were thinking. THEN they may or may not speak to each other about it.
My E-mail to you Dr. Bob was at least 2 months ago about the subject, Crushed brought this up only a few days ago, and I've never even posted on the board to Crushed before two days ago never mind babblemailed.

You can check that.

And in the following post "I'm well aware that some people would prefer I was not here"

Another incorrect conclusion:

I would prefer people had to have relatively similar treatment as far as the
P.B.C's go. That's my concern, especially in this case because I have been offended by the posts personally, not soley because I'm being nit-picky about the P.B.C's


 

I'd like to reiterate - please do not post to me (nm) » gabbii

Posted by alexandra_k on July 17, 2005, at 17:01:59

In reply to Re: a complaint Please Dr. bob? look at t his., posted by gabbii on July 17, 2005, at 16:53:21

 

My D.NP to you was never rescinded Alex » gabbii

Posted by gabbii on July 17, 2005, at 17:12:00

In reply to Re: a complaint Please Dr. bob? look at t his., posted by gabbii on July 17, 2005, at 16:53:21

My post was to Dr.Bob

 

Dr. Bob I'm livid--Please note.

Posted by gabbii on July 17, 2005, at 17:13:43

In reply to I'd like to reiterate - please do not post to me (nm) » gabbii, posted by alexandra_k on July 17, 2005, at 17:01:59

Here are things I've said about Lou and about
Larry Hoovers block

About LOU

> I'm somewhat biased though, I have learned much from Lou's insight, especially on one particular post mentioning the holocaust, and another on a joke I didn't consider racist, though, I at first thought it was nit-picky. I wouldn't want to lose that. I also have deep respect for the fact that no matter how cruel the things are that have been said to him, he never responds in kind.

It's not always good humor, sometimes it's genuine appreciation/respect for the contributions of the person involved.

About Larry's block

And though I'm all for respecting the D.N.P's I think 6 weeks is unnecessary..."

Emmy had every right to make her D.N.P request and expect that it would be validated by Dr.Bob


Go forward in thread:


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.